Machine learning for misfire detection in a dynamic firing level modulation controlled engine of a vehicle

ABSTRACT

Using machine learning for cylinder misfire detection in a dynamic firing level modulation controlled internal combustion engine is described. In a classification embodiment, cylinder misfires are differentiated from intentional skips based on a measured exhaust manifold pressure. In a regressive model embodiment, the measured exhaust manifold pressure is compared to a predicted exhaust manifold pressure generated by neural network in response to one or more inputs indicative of the operation of the vehicle. Based on the comparison, a prediction is made if a misfire has occurred or not. In yet other alternative embodiment, angular crank acceleration is used as well for misfire detection.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a Divisional of U.S. application Ser. No.17/026,706, filed on Sep. 21, 2020, which is a Continuation-in-Part ofU.S. application Ser. No. 16/180,703 filed Nov. 5, 2018 (now U.S. Pat.No. 10,816,438, issued on Oct. 27, 2020), which claims priority of U.S.Provisional Application No. 62/585,648, filed on Nov. 14, 2017.

U.S. application Ser. No. 17/026,706 also claims priority of U.S.Provisional Application No. 62/980,821 filed Feb. 24, 2020.

All of the above-listed applications are incorporated herein byreference in their entirety for all purposes.

BACKGROUND

The present invention relates generally to operating an internalcombustion engine using dynamic firing level modulation, and moreparticularly, to using machine learning to detect cylinder misfireswhile operating the internal combustion engine in the DSF mode.

Most vehicles in operation today are powered by internal combustion (IC)engines. Internal combustion engines typically have a plurality ofcylinders where combustion occurs. Under normal driving conditions, thetorque generated by an internal combustion engine needs to vary over awide range in order to meet the operational demands of the driver.

The fuel efficiency of many types of internal combustion engines can besubstantially improved by dynamically varying the displacement of theengine. With dynamic displacement, the engine can generate fulldisplacement when needed, but otherwise operate at a smallerdisplacement when full torque is not required, resulting in improvedfuel efficiency.

The most common method of varying the displacement today is deactivatingone or more banks or groups of cylinders. For example, with a sixcylinder engine, a bank of three cylinders may be deactivated or groupsof two, three, or four cylinders may be deactivated. With this approach,no fuel is delivered to the deactivated cylinders and their associatedintake and exhaust valves are kept closed as long as the cylindersremain deactivated.

Another engine control approach that varies the effective displacementof an engine is referred to as “dynamic skip fire” (DSF) engine control.In general, skip fire engine control contemplates selectively skippingthe firing of certain cylinders during selected firing opportunities.Thus, a particular cylinder may be fired during one engine cycle andthen may be skipped during the next engine cycle and then selectivelyskipped or fired during the next. Skip fire engine operation isdistinguished from conventional variable displacement engine control inwhich a designated group of one or more cylinders is simultaneouslydeactivated and remain deactivated as long as the engine remains in thesame effective reduced displacement.

In general, DSF engine control facilitates finer control of theeffective engine displacement than is possible using a conventionalvariable displacement approach. For example, firing every third cylinderin a 4-cylinder engine would provide an effective displacement of ⅓^(rd)of the full engine displacement, which is a fractional displacement thatis not obtainable by simply deactivating a set of cylinders.Conceptually, virtually any effective displacement can be obtained usingskip fire control, although in practice most implementations restrictoperation to a set of available firing fractions, sequences or patterns.The Applicant has filed a number of patents describing variousapproaches to skip fire control. By way of example, U.S. Pat. Nos.7,849,835; 7,886,715; 7,954,474; 8,099,224; 8,131,445; 8,131,447;8,464,690; 8,616,181; 8,651,091; 8,839,766; 8,869,773; 9,020,735:9,086,020; 9,120,478; 9,175,613; 9,200,575; 9,200,587; 9,291,106;9,399,964 and others, describe a variety of engine controllers that makeit practical to operate a wide variety of internal combustion engines ina skip fire operational mode. Each of these patents is incorporatedherein by reference.

Many of these patents relate to dynamic skip fire control in whichfiring decisions regarding whether to skip or fire a particular cylinderduring a particular working cycle are made in real time—often justbriefly before the working cycle begins and often on an individualcylinder firing opportunity by firing opportunity basis.

A number of methods are known to detect misfires with conventionalall-cylinder firing spark-ignition engines. One such approach relies ondetermining crankshaft angular acceleration during the power stroke. Ina conventional all-cylinder firing engine, all the engine's cylindersgenerate approximately equal torque during their respective powerstrokes. The total engine torque is the sum of the individual cylindertorques with the appropriate phase offset between them. Since angularacceleration is proportional to torque, the misfire of a particularcylinder results in reduced angular acceleration during the power strokeof that cylinder. This reduced angular acceleration is used to determinea misfire. Other known methods rely on using a signal of a knock sensoror a torque model. For conventional all-cylinder firing engines, theseapproaches provide a reasonably accurate means for misfire detection.

In a controlled DSF engine, however, the above approaches are inadequatefor misfire detection. During DSF operation, the firing state (i.e.either fired or skipped) of other cylinders will impact the angularacceleration for the cylinder under test. Also, the cylinder under testmay be dynamically skipped instead of fired, which results in a missingtorque pulse and/or low angular acceleration. Since the lack of torqueproduction in a skipped cylinder has an angular acceleration profilesimilar to a misfire, it difficult to discern a misfire from a skip whenlooking only at angular acceleration during that cylinder's powerstroke.

Machine learning has been used in various fields for predictive analysisfor a number of years now. Artificial neural networks and deep learningare now commonly used to address complex problems such as imagerecognition, speech recognition, and natural language processing forinstance. In the automotive industry, the use of neural networks isknown in such areas ranging from air/fuel ratio estimation and controland vehicle fault diagnostics, including misfire detection inconventional internal combustion engines. However, to the best knowledgeof the Applicant, machine learning has not been applied to misfiredetection for a DSF controlled internal combustion engine.

SUMMARY

The present application is directed toward using machine learning formisfire detection in a dynamic firing level modulation controlledinternal combustion engine. Dynamic firing level modulation, as usedherein, is intended to broadly construed to include, but is not limitedto (a) Dynamic Skip Fire (DSF) where cylinders are selectively eitherfired or skipped and/or (b) dynamic multi-charge level operation whereall cylinders are fired, but individual working cycles are intentionallyoperated at different output levels.

In a first non-exclusive embodiment, a neural network is used to modelan expected exhaust manifold pressure for a fired cylinder or anintentionally skipped cylinder. The output of the neural network is thencompared to a signal indicative of a measured exhaust manifold pressurefollowing a cylinder event. Based upon the comparison(s), a predictionis made if a misfire has occurred or not. In other words if a fire iscommanded and the measured exhaust manifold pressure falls outside afirst distribution range for successful firings, then a determination ismade that the cylinder misfired. Similarly, if a skip is commanded andthe measured exhaust manifold pressure falls outside a seconddistribution range for successful skips, then a determination is madethat the cylinder was at least partially fired instead of skipped. Themodels for the first and second distribution ranges are typicallydefined from empirical data generated for a given internal combustionengine. In other words the engine is operated and exhaust manifoldpressure measurements are collected during both cylinder firing eventsand cylinder skipped events. Based on the collected measurements, thedistribution ranges for successful firings and successful skips can bedefined.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The invention and the advantages thereof, may best be understood byreference to the following description taken in conjunction with theaccompanying drawings in which:

FIG. 1 is a graph illustrating cylinder firing frequency as a functionof torque demand for a Dynamic Skip Fire (DSF) controlled internalcombustion engine.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram of an exemplary neural network used innon-exclusive embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 3 illustrates a hyperbolic tangent (“tanh”) function used by theneural network in accordance with a non-exclusive embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 4 illustrates a rectified linear (“ReLU”) function used by theneural network in accordance with a non-exclusive embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 5 illustrates a schematic block diagram for implementingregression-based machine learning for misfire detection in accordancewith a non-exclusive embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 6 depicts how angular crank acceleration for an exemplaryfour-cylinder engine is calculated in accordance with a non-exclusiveembodiment of the invention.

FIG. 7 is a plot showing a comparison between predicted and measuredcrank acceleration generated during training of an exemplary neuralnetwork used in a non-exclusive embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 8 is a schematic diagram of a misfire detection unit in accordancewith a non-exclusive embodiment of the invention.

FIGS. 9-10 are representative confusion matrices showing the validationresults of the regression model.

FIGS. 11-15 are plots showing representative behavior of variousparameters used to generate a misfire diagnostic signal under variousoperating conditions.

FIGS. 16-18 illustrate various test results for predicting misfires fora Dynamic Skip Fire (DSF) controlled internal combustion engine using aclassification-based model in accordance with another embodiment of thepresent invention.

FIG. 19 is a logic diagram of a fault detection system that is used incooperation with a skip fire controlled internal combustion engine thatis optionally used with an Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) system and/orturbo-charging system in accordance with non-exclusive embodiments ofthe present invention.

FIG. 20A is an exemplary plot of expected exhaust gas pressurefluctuations over several working cycles showing several successfulcylinder firings and an unsuccessful firing (i.e., a misfire).

FIG. 20B is an exemplary plot of expected exhaust gas pressurefluctuations over several working cycles showing several successfulcylinder skips and an unsuccessful skip.

FIG. 21A and is an exemplary flow diagram illustrating steps fordeveloping a fire model in accordance with a non-exclusive embodiment ofthe invention.

FIG. 21B is an exemplary fire model that shows distribution ranges forsuccessful and unsuccessful cylinder firings and a threshold between thetwo in accordance with a non-exclusive embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 22A is an exemplary flow diagram illustrating steps for developinga skip model in accordance with a non-exclusive embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 22B is an exemplary skip model that shows distribution ranges forsuccessful and unsuccessful cylinder skips and a threshold between thetwo in accordance with a non-exclusive embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 23 is a block diagram of an exemplary neural network used ingenerating the fire model and the skip model in accordance with anothernon-exclusive embodiment of the invention.

In the drawings, like reference numerals are sometimes used to designatelike structural elements. It should also be appreciated that thedepictions in the figures are diagrammatic and not to scale.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The present application is directed toward using machine learning formisfire detection in a dynamic firing level modulation controlledinternal combustion engine, which is intended to include both (a)Dynamic Skip Fire (DSF) where cylinders are selectively either fired orskipped and/or (b) dynamic multi-charge level operation where allcylinders are fired, but individual working cycles are intentionallyoperated at different output levels. For the sake of brevity, themachine learning approach for misfire detection is largely described inthe context of DSF control of an internal combustion engine. It shouldbe understood that the same machine learning approach can also beapplied to dynamic multi-charge level operation in a very similarmanner. The following discussion should therefore not be construed aslimiting in any regard.

Dynamic Skip Fire (DSF) engine controllers often have a defined set offiring patterns or firing fractions that can be used during skip fireoperation of an internal combustion engine. Each firing pattern/fractionhas a corresponding effective engine displacement. Often the set offiring patterns/fractions that are supported is relatively limited—forexample—a particular engine may be limited to using firing fractions of⅓, ½, ⅔ and 1. Other skip fire controllers facilitate the use ofsignificantly more unique firing patterns or fractions. By way ofexample, some skip fire controllers designed by the Applicant facilitateoperation at any firing fraction between zero (0) and one (1) having aninteger denominator of nine (9) or less. Such a controller has a set of29 potential firing fractions, specifically: 0, 1/9, ⅛, 1/7, ⅙, ⅕, 2/9,¼, 2/7, ⅓, ⅜, ⅖, 3/7, 4/9, ½, 5/9, 4/7, ⅗, ⅝, ⅔, 5/7, ¾, 7/9, ⅘, ⅚, 6/7,⅞, 8/9 and 1. Although 29 potential firing fractions may be possible,not all firing fractions are suitable for use in all circumstances.Rather, at any given time, there may be a much more limited set offiring fractions that are capable of delivering the desired enginetorque while satisfying manufacturer imposed drivability and noise,vibration and harshness (NVH) constraints. An engine's firing pattern orfiring fraction may also be expressed as an effective operationaldisplacement, which indicates the average displacement of the engineused to generate torque by combustion of fuel under the currentoperating conditions.

Improved Fuel Efficiency

Referring to FIG. 1, a graph illustrating cylinder firing frequency as afunction of torque demand for a DSF controlled internal combustionengine in shown. As the DSF controller selectively deactivatescylinders, fuel economy may be significantly improved by minimizedpumping losses as fewer cylinders are operating at their peak efficiencyto deliver the varying torque demands. This relationship is illustratedin FIG. 1, which shows firing density versus torque demand. As thetorque demand decreases, the density of firing cylinders also decreases.As a result, the fuel efficiency gains of DSF operation are greater atlow torque demands and low firing densities.

Neural Network Model

Neural networks are computing systems that “learn” to perform tasks byconsidering examples, generally without being programmed with anytask-specific rules. Common applications of neural networks includeimage recognition, speech recognition and natural language processing.With each application, the neural network “learns” from known examplesof a subject and then automatically applies this learned knowledge toidentify unknown examples of the same or similar subjects. For example,neural networks that learn from known examples of images, speech ornatural language utterances learn to recognize unknown examples ofimages, speech and natural language utterances respectively.

Referring to FIG. 2, a model of a neural network 10 that can be used forskip fire detection with a DSF operated engine is shown. The model ofthe neural network 10 includes an input layer 12, an inputpre-processing layer 14, one or more “hidden” layer(s) 16 and an outputlayer 18. The input layer 12 defines a number of inputs (X₁, X₂, X₃ . .. X_(N)). The input pre-processing layer normalizes the inputs. Each ofone or more hidden layers 16 (HL₁ to HL_(N)) includes a number ofprocessors (Θ₁, Θ₂, Θ₃, . . . Θ_(N)) for implementing functions. Each ofthe hidden layers 16 is arranged to receive inputs from previous layerand provide processed outputs to the next layer. For instance, the firsthidden layer HL₁ receives pre-processed inputs (X₁, X₂, X₃ . . . X_(N))respectively and provides outputs to the second hidden layer HL₂. Thesecond hidden layer HL₂, after processing the inputs, provides itsoutput to the next hidden layer HL₃. The third hidden layer HL₃processes the its inputs and provides its output to the output layer 18,which performs further post-processing on the outputs generated byhidden layers 16. In various embodiments, as described in more detailbelow, the output layer generates (a) a misfire detection probabilityoutput or (b) a misfire flag.

In the model shown, only three tiers of hidden layers 16 are shown forthe sake of simplicity. It should be understood that with many neuralnetworks, any number of tiers may be used. Each successive tier ofprocessors Θ receive inputs from the outputs of the preceding tier ofprocessors Θ. The output layer 18 includes one or more processors Θ,which generate the final outputs or answers of the neural network 10.Neural networks 10 are typically initially trained, which consists ofproviding large amounts of input data to the input layer 12 and tellingthe neural network what the outputs should be. In response, the neuralnetwork 10 adapts and learns.

To initiate the machine learning process, the input data waspreprocessed by the input layer 12. In a non-exclusive embodiment, amin-max normalization technique was applied so that all of the data wasscaled from −1 to +1. The data was divided into training, validation andtest sets in a ratio of 70%-15%-15% respectively for 3-foldcross-validation purposes. It should be understood that dividing thedata up into different categories and ratios is exemplary and should notbe construed as limiting. In other embodiments, any number or type ofcategories and/or ratios may be used.

The neural network hypothesis H_(w,b)(x) is then computed by the forwardpropagation algorithm. The inputs and the outputs of the layer arerelated by a transformation function:

$\begin{bmatrix}1 \\{\theta\left( s^{(l)} \right)}\end{bmatrix}\quad$

where θ(s^((l))) is a vector whose components are θ(s_(j) ^((l))). Thesignal going into node j in layer l is s_(j) ^((l)) and is the weightedsum of the outputs from the previous layer's (l−1) activation functionwhich forms the input for the next layer, l. This is represented as:sl=(Wl)>x(l−1)where weights are specified as W^((l)). A bias term (intercept) is alsoadded as an extra feature to the input layer denoted as x₀, where x₀=1.

In various embodiments, the activation function performed by theprocessors Θ of the hidden layer(s) 16, can be either: sigmoid,hyperbolic tangent (“tanh”), or Rectified Linear (“ReLU”), etc.

For the output layer 18, the processor(s) θ is/are usually set toidentity function for regression models or a sigmoid to calculateprobability scores for classification models. H_(w,b)(x) is the finalhypothesis and w, b are weights and biases respectively.

Activation Functions

In non-exclusive embodiments, tanh and ReLU functions were used for theregression model and the classification model respectively.

Referring to FIG. 3, a plot of the hyperbolic tangent (“tanh”) functionis shown. In this example, the mathematical formula used istanh(x)=2σ(2x)−1. An attribute of the hyperbolic tangent function isthat, for any input, it outputs a number between 1 and −1. In somesituations, the non-linearity of the hyperbolic tangent function ispreferred over sigmoid non-linearity due to its zero centeredproperties. However, the hyperbolic tangent function also suffers fromsaturation.

Referring to FIG. 4, a rectified linear (“ReLU”) function is shown. Themathematical formula used is ƒ(x)=max(0, x). It performs better whencompared to tanh/sigmoid activation functions as it accelerates theconvergence of stochastic gradient descent.

In order to ensure that both algorithms yield accurate predictions,their performance was rated based on the loss function. For a regressionbased model, a sum of the squared loss function was minimized. For aclassification model, a cross entropy loss or log loss was minimizedWith the latter function, the lower the values, the better theapproximation and generalization towards the final model (keepingover-fitting in mind). In other words, the squared loss is representedby:

$\frac{1}{2m}{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{m}\left( {{\hat{y}}_{i} - y_{i}} \right)^{2}}$

where the log-loss equals:

${- \frac{1}{N}}{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{N}\left\lbrack {{y_{i}\log\; p_{i}} + {\left( {1 - y_{i}} \right){\log\left( {1 - p_{i}} \right)}}} \right\rbrack}$

The loss function was reduced by using a dynamic programming algorithmknown as back-propagation. This technique allows computation of thepartial derivatives of the loss function with respect to every weight.Derivatives indicate how sensitive the whole expression is with respectto each of the variables acting upon it. The chain rule is appliedinductively, writing the partial derivatives in layer L using thepartial derivatives in layer (L+1).

An initial weight was chosen to prevent convergence to local minimums.Weights were assigned to a small non-zero value as there will be nosource of asymmetry and no learning will happen when the weight is setto zero. As a result, it is advantageous to randomly initialize weights.However, one of the drawbacks of this approach is that the outputdistribution of neurons in the network will have very small variances,and as a result, will tend to reduce the gradients duringback-propagation causing a slow convergence and a less than idealgeneralization. For more details on this technique, see Glorot, X. andBengio, Y., “Understanding the difficulty of training deep feed forwardneural networks,” In Proceedings of AISTATS 2010, volume 9, pp. 249256,May 2010, which is incorporated by reference in its entirety for allpurposes.

A normalized initialization is useful in improving the convergence rate.In a non-exclusive embodiment, the following initialization step may beused:

$W \sim {U\left\lbrack {\frac{- \sqrt{6}}{\sqrt{n_{j} + n_{j + 1}}},\frac{\sqrt{6}}{\sqrt{n_{j} + n_{j + 1}}}} \right\rbrack}$

where U [−a, b] is the uniform distribution in the interval, [−a, b] andn_(j) and n_(j+1) are the sizes of the previous layer and next layerrespectively.

The above-described protocol may be used for both tanh and ReLUactivations.

In order to determine the value of weights which minimizes the lossfunction, two techniques were used to solve this optimization problem:Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) and Limited memory BFGS (L-BFGS) forthe classification and regression method respectively. SGD is from theclass of gradient descent where instead of performing a batch gradientdescent on the entire dataset, mini-batches of the dataset are taken andgradient updates are performed only on those at a time. SGD is mostcommon way for minimizing the neural net loss functions. L-BFGS is fromthe family of quasi-Newton methods which is an improvement over BFGStechnique in terms of space and time. However, a disadvantage of L-BFGSis that it has to be computed over the entire training set causinglonger training time. During training, it was determined that L-BFGSperformed better than SGD for the regression based method.

Machine Learning Algorithms

In different embodiments, two different machine learning methods aredescribed. The first method is regression-based. The second method isclassification-based. It should be understood that the misfire detectionas described herein is not necessarily limited to neural networkalgorithms. In yet other embodiments, other algorithms such as aDecision Tree or other Ensemble algorithms may be used.

In the ensuing discussion, misfire detection is initially discussed inthe context of angular acceleration. Thereafter, the misfire detectionis discussed in terms of exhaust manifold pressure.

Regression Based Machine Learning Embodiment Angular Crank Acceleration

With the regression-based machine learning model, the expected crankacceleration is calculated from a number of inputs, including the skipfire sequence. Once the expected the angular crank acceleration is/arecalculated, the predicted values is/are compared to a measured crankacceleration respectively. The outcome of comparison is used to predicta misfire.

Referring to FIG. 5, a schematic black diagram 50 for implementingregression-based machine learning for misfire detection using angularcrank acceleration is illustrated. The logic diagram 50 includes a crankacceleration calculation module 52, a time processing unit 54. a misfiredetection module 58, neural network 10, and an optional misfire counterand statistical analysis module 60. The neural network 10 is arranged toreceive a number of inputs 56 (see table I below),

The measured angular crank acceleration is a measure of the force usedto push a piston down within its cylinder during a power stroke. Withstrong or weak combustion, the rotational speed of the crank willincrease or decrease respectively. In a non-exclusive embodiment, theangular crank acceleration is measured by using the sensor to measurethe crank angle as a function of time. From this information, theacceleration of the piston from at or near Top Dead Center (TDC) of thepower stroke to the middle or end of the power stroke, when most of thepower resulting from combustion has been delivered to the engine, can bedetermined.

The time processing unit 54 receives a signal from a sensor, such as asquare wave, with the spacing between pulses indicative of the vehiclecrank shaft angular velocity. In response, the time processing unit 54provides a Revolutions Per Minute (RPM) signal indicative of themeasured rotational speed of the crankshaft to the crank accelerationcalculation module 52. The crank acceleration calculation module 52provides a measured angular crank acceleration value to the misfiredetection module 58. In non-exclusive embodiments, the sensor is aHall-effect sensor. In other embodiments, other types of sensors may beused.

Although a cylinder misfire is typically detected based on crank angularacceleration calculated from crank wheel sensor signals. However, insome instances, especially for heavy duty diesel engine applicationswhere engines can be installed on a wide variety of vehicle platforms,the method based on crank angular acceleration may not be robust enoughdue to, for example, significant damping on the crankshaft fromconnected drive train. Depending on the applications and vehicleconfigurations, the effect from driveline on crank angular accelerationcould be different.

Referring to FIG. 6, the calculation performed by the calculated crankacceleration calculation module 52 for an exemplary four-cylinder engineis depicted. The calculation is performed over a 90-degree moving windowand is updated every six (6) crank degrees (each crank tooth). The90-degree window is further divided into five 18-degree periods. Thefirst two periods are averaged to obtain first angular velocity(“degrees/s 1”) and the last two segments are averaged to obtain thesecond angular velocity (“degrees/s 2”). The angular acceleration may bedetermined by subtracting the first angular velocity from the secondangular velocity and dividing by the time between the two measurements.

In non-exclusive embodiments, the calculated crank acceleration is thenfiltered by a band-pass filter to improve signal clarity by excludingnoise sources outside of the frequency of interest. The resulting signalis then latched every cylinder event (180 crank degrees for a 4-cylinderengine) at a location corresponding to its peak crank accelerationvalues.

The degree window, number of degrees per period, number of periods, etc.all may vary from engine to engine and are not limited to those depictedin FIG. 6. With different engines, working chambers or cylinders,different sizes, etc., each of these parameters may vary accordingly.Furthermore, the above-described embodiment is just one of many possiblemethods or techniques that can be used for measuring angular crankacceleration. FIG. 6 should therefore be considered as merely exemplaryand should not be interpreted as limiting in any manner.

Referring again to FIG. 5, the neural network 10 is arranged to receivea plurality of inputs (X₁, X₂, X₃ . . . X_(N)) as noted above. Suchinputs may be specific to the vehicle in which the misfire detection isperformed. Such vehicle-specific inputs may include (a) the displacementof the engine, (b) the configuration of the engine (e.g., inline,straight, V etc.), (c) the peak power of the engine, (d) the peak torqueof the engine, (e) transmission type, (f) valve train type (e.g., DualOverhead Cam, cam-in-block, etc.) and (g) the mechanism(s) used by theengine for cylinder deactivation.

In non-exclusive embodiments, Table I provided below provides anon-exhaustive list of additional possible inputs and their minimum andmaximum values, which may be normalized by pre-processor 14 to have thesame scale between (−1) and (1).

It is further noted that the input parameters include both those thatare common with conventional engines and others that are unique to DSFengines, such as Fire Skip Status, Fire Enable Flag, Cylinder SkipNumber, Order Skip Number and DCCO Exit Flag. These terms are defined inmore detail below.

TABLE I List of Input Variables for Regression Model # Input VariableUnits Min Max 1 Spark Timing (Gas Engine) deg 0 30 2 Start of MainInjection (Diesel deg −20 50 Engine) 3 Total Fuel Mass per Cylindermg/stk 0 120 4 Fire Skip Status — 0 15 5 Fire Enable Flag — 0 1 6Cylinder Skip Number — 0 50 7 Order Skip Number — 0 80 8 Mass Air perCyl gram/stk 0 2.4 9 Cam Phaser Timing deg −60 0 10 Charge Air Temp degC. 12 52 11 Engine Speed rpm 500 3000 12 MAP kPa 0 150 13 Gear — 0 12 14DCCO Exit — 0 1 15 Vehicle Speed mph 0 100 16 Torque Request Nm 0 100017 Pedal Position % 0 100 18 Throttle Position % 0 100 19 Turbo WGPosition % 0 100 20 Fuel Pressure bar 0 2500 21 Pilot and Post InjectionFuel Quantity mg/stk 0 40 22 Pilot and Post Injection Timing deg −50 18023 EGR Fraction or EGR Valve Position % 0 100 24 VGT Vane Position % 0100 25 Exhaust Manifold Pressure kPa 0 400

The Fire Skip Status is a parameter to indicate whether each of the fourcylinders is a fire or a skip cycle at a particular time. It is definedas:Fire Skip Status=FS _(N−2)*2³ +FS _(N−1)*2² +FS _(N)*2¹ +FS _(N+1)*2⁰

where:

FS_(N) is Fire Enable Flag of the cylinder of interest which is coded as1 for a firing cycle and 0 for a skip cycle;

FS_(N+1), FS_(N−1) and FS_(N−2) are Fire Enable Flags for the nextcylinder, the previous cylinder and the opposing cylinder, respectively.

Fire Skip Status, which is a weighted value ranging from 0 to 15 in anon-exclusive embodiment. With DSF operation, the various possible DSFpatterns affects the crank acceleration in a slightly different way.Each possible DSF pattern is thus assigned a weighted value between 0(all cylinders are skipped) and 15 (all cylinders are fired.

Cylinder Skip Number is defined as the number of skips preceding eachfiring for each cylinder in its own firing history;

Order Skip Number is the number of skips preceding each firing in thefiring order.

DCCO Exit Flag is a flag to indicate whether it is an air pump-downevent where the valves are open normally without fuel injection toreduce intake manifold pressure following Deceleration Cylinder Cut-Off(DCCO) events.

The above input parameters are critical variables for the machinelearning algorithms for DSF engines since the crank acceleration at anyparticular point in time is significantly impacted by these parameters.

In a non-exclusive embodiment, the neural network 10 includes two hiddenlayers. The number of processor or “neurons” of each hidden layer may beoptimized based on the training data set using a Limited-memory BFGS(L-BFGS) technique, as is well known in the machine learning art.

In the non-exclusive implementation, there the first layer includestwenty-three (23) and eleven (11) processors Θ for the second hiddenlayer. Further with this embodiment, each processor Θ of both hiddenlayers used the tanh activation function. The best hyper-parameter wasdecided based on the validation error recorded by a three-fold crossvalidation through multiple runs. Based on the training data set, themodel provides a set of weights and biases which are used to predictcrank acceleration. It should be understood that the number of hiddenlayers and the number of processors Θ for each hidden layer specifiedherein are merely exemplary and should not be construed as limiting inany manner. On the contrary, the neural network 10 may include anynumber of hidden layers, each having any number of processors Θ.

Referring to FIG. 7, a curve-fitting plot showing the comparison betweenthe predicted and measured crank acceleration for the training data usedto train the neural network 10 is shown. The figure illustrates that thepredicted crank acceleration agrees with measured crank accelerationreasonably well with a R² of 0.998.

The misfire detection module 58 compares the predicted angular crankacceleration obtained from the neural network 10 to the measured crankacceleration as described from the crank acceleration calculation module52 to determine whether a misfire has occurred. Misfires are determinedusing a parameter herein referred to as a Misfire Detection Metric(MDM), which is defined as:MDM=(1+(CrankAccel_(expected)−CrankAccel_(measured)/CrankAccel_(Normalizing))−B)³

To make the MDM parameter dimensionless, a normalizing crankacceleration, which is a moving average of modeled crank acceleration ofonly firing cycles, is used as denominator. B is a constant to bias thesignal in order to center the detection threshold to be around 1. Theresult is then raised to the power of three (3) to amplify the signal tonoise ratio. By using this normalized metric, the threshold no longerdepends on speed or torque, which eliminates the need forspeed/load-based look-up tables.

When the MDM metric exceeds a threshold, it is determined that a misfirehas occurred. If the MDM metric falls below the threshold, then it isdetermined that no misfire has occurred.

In an optional embodiment, the misfire counter and statistical analysismodule 60 is arranged to count the number of detected cylinder misfireswhile the engine is operating in DSF mode. As a general rule, the driveror other systems on the vehicle, such as an On-Board Diagnostic (OBD)system is/are preferably not notified every time a misfire is detected.The module 60 is therefore optionally used to count the number misfiredetections and/or apply statistical analysis, and then generates anotice if a predefined threshold value is exceeded. For example, thethreshold value may be an absolute number (e.g., 5, 10, 15, 25, etc.) ofmisfires or a certain percentage of misfires per number of firingopportunities (e.g. 1%, 5%, 10%, etc.). In either case, when thethreshold value is exceeded, a notification is generated.

Classification Based Embodiment for Predicting Misfires Angular CrankAcceleration

With the classification-based model, machine learning is used todirectly predict misfire flags. The neural network is arranged toreceive both the inputs indicative of the vehicle and its operation andthe signal(s) indicative measured crank acceleration. The neuralnetwork, in response, directly predicts the probability of a misfire. Ifthe probability exceeds a threshold, then it is determined that amisfire occurred.

Referring to FIG. 8, a block diagram of a misfire detection unit 80 forimplementing classification-based machine learning for misfire detectionis illustrated. The misfire detection unit 80 includes a crankacceleration calculation module 52, a time processing unit 54, a neuralnetwork 10 arranged to receive a number of inputs 82, and a misfirecounter and statistical analysis module 60. As elements 52, 54, and 60were previously described, a discussion of their operation is notrepeated herein for the sake of brevity.

The inputs 82 to the neural network 10 for the classification-basedmodel are similar, although not identical to, those of theregression-based model. With this embodiment, the inputs 82 include acombination of (a) the vehicle-specific inputs noted above, (b) theinputs listed in the Table I provided above, and (c) an additional inputvariable, the crank acceleration as expressed in degrees/second² orother appropriate units and having a minimum and maximum value and. In anon-exclusive embodiment, these minimum and maximum values are −80,000deg/s² and 180,000 deg/s² respectfully. It should be noted that thesevalues are exemplary and should not be construed as limiting. Othervalues ranging from −150,000 deg/s² to 400,000 deg/s² may be useddepending on a number of circumstances, such as the type of vehicle,type of internal combustion engine, etc.

In a non-exclusive embodiment, the neural network 10 used for theclassification-based model includes two hidden layers. The first hiddenlayer includes twenty-three (23) processors Θ and the second hiddenlayer uses four (4) processors Θ. The processors Θ of both hidden layersare optimized for training data and use a Stochastic Gradient Descent(SGD) technique. Each of the processors Θ of both hidden layers alsoimplements the ReLU activation function. In this implementation, thelearning rate is kept constant as long as the training loss keepsdecreasing. If the training loss does not improve within a certaintolerance for two consecutive epochs, the learning rate was then dividedby five.

The output from the output layer of the neural network 10 is aprobability score between 0 and 1. This score can be regarded as MisfireProbability which is used to classify each data point as a misfire ornon-misfire point based on whether or not its value is greater than orless than 0.5 respectively. It should be understood that the valuesprovided herein are merely exemplary and should not be construed aslimiting as other values may be used.

The classification model offers a number of advantages. Although theregression-based machine learning approach described above can correctlyidentify misfires under almost all conditions, the process involvescomparing the predicted crank acceleration with the measured crankacceleration and requires calibration efforts to specify appropriatethresholds for various firing skip sequences. With the classificationmodel, the need to calibrate is eliminated or significantly reduced.

Vehicle Tests—Angular Crank Acceleration

The development of misfire detection on a DSF engine was carried out ona Volkswagen Jetta vehicle equipped with a four-cylinder 1.8-literturbocharged GDI (Gasoline Direct Injection) engine. The valve train ofthe engine and the engine controller were modified so that the testengine is capable of deactivating all four cylinders individually.

To conduct the test, the engine control unit of the vehicle was modifiedso that any firing density or firing sequence under steady state ortransient driving conditions could be specified. This allows test datato be collected at all engine operating conditions for model developmentand validation.

Misfire generation code was developed for the engine controller to allowsimulated misfires to be induced at any specified frequency for anygiven cylinder. Misfires are simulated by not injecting fuel for acylinder that is otherwise scheduled to fire. This approach approximatesa misfire from a torque and valve state standpoint, but protects thecatalyst of the vehicle from potential damage by avoiding large amountsof unburnt hydrocarbons flowing into the converter.

The vehicle was driven on public roads at quasi steady state or a normaldriving pattern for data collection. A large amount of vehicle data withand without induced misfires is collected by driving the vehicle onpublic roads. The signals recorded in the datasets include commandedfire skip sequence and induced misfire commands in addition to vehiclespeed, engine speed, intake manifold pressure, cam position, etc. Thecrank acceleration signal was calculated based on crankshaft angularspeed or crank periods generated from a production 60-2 teeth cranktrigger wheel. The data was then fed into a machine learning algorithmas described herein.

Both the regression-based and the classification-based algorithms werevalidated with two sets of vehicle test data. The validation data setswere collected from two vehicle test drives with misfire induced ateither a predetermined frequency (test 1) or in a randomized pattern(test 2). Both test drives included a number of idle and quasi steadystate driving periods, as well as acceleration and decelerationtransient maneuvers.

Test Results—Regression Model and Angular Crank Acceleration

FIGS. 9 and 10 are confusion matrices showing the validation results ofthe regression model. A confusion matrix, also known as an error matrix,allows visualization of the performance of an algorithm in terms ofProbability of Detection (true positive), Type I Error Rate (falsenegative), Type II Error Rate (false positive), Specificity (truenegative), and F1 score. F1 score is the harmonic mean of Precision andProbability of Detection, also known as Recall:FI Score=2/((1/Precision)+(1/Probability of Detection)),

where Precision is the ratio of true positives to total number ofpredicted positives, (i.e. the sum of true positives and falsepositives) and

where Probability of Detection is the ratio of true positives to totalnumber of actual positives in the population.

An F1 score over 0.9 indicates an excellent prediction by the model. TheF1 scores from the implemented regression model for the two sets ofvalidation data are 0.9197 and 0.9664, respectively.

Referring now to FIGS. 11 through 15, each of which shows a series ofplots showing representative behavior of various parameters used togenerate a misfire diagnostic signal under various operating conditions.Each of FIGS. 11 through 15 includes a five graphs, including:

Graph A, which shows the deliberately programmed misfires as a functionof firing opportunity or equivalently cylinder event number;

Graph B, which shows the vehicle speed and fire (1) and no fire (0)decision associated with each firing opportunity;

Graph C, which shows the predicted crank shaft acceleration and measuredcrank shaft acceleration as a function of firing opportunity. Themeasured crank shaft acceleration may be the output of crankacceleration calculation module 52 shown in FIG. 5. The predicted crankacceleration may be the output of the neural network module 10 shown inFIG. 5;Graph D, which shows the misfire metric and misfire threshold as afunction of firing opportunity; andGraph E, which shows the misfire detection signal as a function offiring opportunity. A detected misfire is a logical 1 and when nomisfire is detected the misfire detection signal is a logical 0. Thissignal may be the output of the misfire detection module 58 shown inFIG. 5.

It is also useful to note that in the embodiments depicted in FIGS. 11through 15, the misfire metric threshold is set to one (1). See line 100in Graph D in each of the figures. As depicted in the figures, when theMDM exceeds line 100 (MDM>1), a misfire is detected, whereas no misfireflag is detected when the MDM is less than one (1).

FIG. 11 illustrates the misfire detection results at drive idle. Asshown on the graph, at every induced misfire, the measured crankshaftangular acceleration drops significantly below the predicted crankacceleration, causing the Misfire Detection Metric (MDM) to spike abovethe preset threshold of one (1). By comparing the locations ofprogrammed and detected misfire flags, shown in Graph A and Graph E,respectively, one can see that the algorithm is capable of detectingevery induced misfire at this condition.

FIGS. 12, 13 and 14 show similar results as those in FIG. 11, but duringacceleration, 20 mph quasi steady state cruising, and decelerationdriving conditions, respectively. During the acceleration period shownin FIG. 12, the firing density is 1 which indicates all cylinders arefiring. There were four misfires induced. The graph demonstrates thatevery induced misfire is successfully detected under this drivingcondition.

FIG. 13 shows a comparison between induced misfire flags shown in thetop Graph A and detected misfire flags shown in the bottom Graph Eduring 20 mph cruising. The segment included a firing density transitionfrom 1 to 0.5, shown in the second Graph B. The graph shows that thepredicted crank acceleration (dashed curve in the third Graph C agreeswith the measured crank acceleration reasonably well, not only for firedcycles, but also for skipped cycles, except for those cylinder eventswith induced misfire. This is also confirmed by examining the misfiremetric (see Graph D) which stays essentially zero except for thosespikes for induced misfire events. Again, all the induced misfires havebeen correctly identified under these conditions (see Graph E). Aspointed out in the graph, it should be noted that the logic canaccurately distinguish a skip from a misfire even though a skip mayexhibit a much more significant crank acceleration drop than that causedby a misfire.

FIG. 14 illustrates an example of misfire detection results duringvehicle deceleration conditions. Although there was one missed detectionof the induced misfire, the metric was close to the preset threshold.Since the separation of metric values between misfires and non-misfiresis quite large, a small adjustment of the threshold would have detectedall induced misfires during this deceleration condition.

FIG. 15 depicts an example of scenarios where the algorithm successfullydetected an actual misfire or air spring. An air spring is defined as acondition where all valves are functioning correctly, but there is nofuel injection commanded to that cylinder. The effects of air spring andmisfire on crank acceleration are similar, except that, in an air springsituation, the algorithm would predict slightly lower crank accelerationthan the misfire case because there was no scheduled fuel mass for theair spring. Examining the raw data of this test point confirms that thelogic has correctly detected an actual misfire for this occurrence.

The regression-based approach thus proves to be a very accurate methodfor detecting misfires in a DSF engine.

Test Results—Classification Model with Angular Crank Acceleration

The same validation data sets used to validate the regression model werealso used to validate this classification model. FIGS. 16 and 17 are theconfusion matrices showing the validation results of the classificationmodel. The graphs show that the classification algorithm yields an F1Score of around 0.96 for both sets of validation data, indicting verygood performance of the model.

FIG. 18 presents detection results for the training data set as well asboth sets of validation data. The x-axis is Misfire Probability which isthe output from the Output layer depicted in FIG. 8. Those with theMisfire Probability of 0.5 and greater may be classified as misfire.Those with misfire probability less than 0.5 may be classified asnon-misfire. The graph demonstrates that the model can correctlyclassify misfire and non-misfire conditions with high confidence. Itshows that greater than 80% of all induced misfires are detected with0.95 probability. For the rest of the induced misfires, majority of themare detected with higher than 0.75 probability. Conversely, the MisfireProbability for almost all non-misfire test points is 0.05. The misfireprobability value is providing an accurate measurement of enginemisfires.

Using Machine Learning to Predict Misfires Based on Exhaust ManifoldPressure

Exhaust manifold pressure signal is a viable alternative to predictingcylinder misfires based on crank angular acceleration. As a result, thepresent application contemplates machine learning for misfire detectionusing exhaust manifold pressure either alone or in combination withangular crank acceleration.

Referring to FIG. 19 a logic diagram 1000 including a fault detectionsystem 10012 that operates in cooperation with a skip fire controller1014 used to control skip fire operation of an internal combustionengine 1016 is shown. In the particular embodiment shown, the internalcombustion engine has six cylinders. The internal combustion engine 1016operates in cooperation with an air intake manifold 1018 and one or moreexhaust manifolds 1020A and 1020B.

The Internal Combustion Engine

In the particular embodiment shown, the internal combustion engine hassix in-line cylinders or working chambers, labeled in the drawing 1, 2,3, 4, 5 and 6 respectively. With six cylinders, six air input runners1022 are provided between the air intake manifold 1018 and each of thesix cylinders respectively. The individual air input runners 1022 areprovided to supply air and potentially other gases for combustion fromthe input manifold 1018 to the individual cylinders respectively. In theparticular embodiment shown, two exhaust manifolds 1020A and 1020B areprovided to direct combusted gases from the cylinders to an exhaustsystem 1026. In particular, three exhaust runners 1024A are providedbetween cylinders 6, 5 and 4 and the first of the two exhaust manifolds1020A and an additional three exhaust runners 1024B are provided betweenthe cylinders 3, 2 and 1 and the second of the two exhaust manifolds1020B. The exhaust manifolds 1020A and 1020B both exhaust to the exhaustsystem 1026.

In various embodiments, the exhaust system 1026 may include any numberof various aftertreatment systems, including but not limited to a Dieselparticulate filter, a Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) system, aDiesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) system and/or a NOx trap which are generallyused for Diesel or lean burn internal combustion engines and/or athree-way catalytic converter, which is typically used for agasoline-fueled, spark ignition, internal combustion engine.

It should be understood that the particular configuration of theinternal combustion engine 1016, the intake manifold 1018 and the twomanifolds exhaust manifolds 1020A and 1020B is merely exemplary. Inactual embodiments, the number of cylinders and the number and/orarrangement of the cylinders may widely vary. For example the number ofcylinders may range from one to any number, such as 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 or16 or more. Also, the cylinders may be arranged in-line as shown, in a Vconfiguration, in multiple cylinder banks, etc. The internal combustionengine may be a Diesel engine, a lean burn engine, a gasoline-fueledengine, a spark ignition engine, or a multi-fuel engine. The engine mayalso use any combination of ignition source, fuel-stratification,air/fuel stoichiometry, or combustion cycle. Also, on the exhaust side,varying numbers of exhaust manifolds may be used, ranging from just oneshared by all cylinders or multiple exhaust manifolds.

Turbocharger and/or Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) Systems

Also included in the particular embodiment shown, the internalcombustion engine 1016 can optionally be used with either or both aturbocharger 1030 and/or an Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) system 1040.

The turbocharger 1030 is used to boost the pressure in the intakemanifold 1018 above atmospheric pressure. With boosted air, the internalcombustion engine 1016 can generate more power compared to a naturallyaspirated engine because more air, and proportionally more fuel, can beinput into the individual cylinders.

The optional turbocharger 1030 includes a turbine 1032, a compressor1034, a waste gate valve 1036 and an air charge cooler 1038. The turbine1032 receives combusted exhaust gases from one or more of the exhaustmanifold(s) 1020A and/or 1020B. In situations where more than twoexhaust manifolds are used, their outputs are typically combined todrive the turbine 1032. The exhaust gases passing through the turbinedrives the compressor 1034, which in turn, boosts the pressure of airprovided to the air charge cooler 1038. The air charge cooler 1038 isresponsible for cooling the compressed air to a desired temperature ortemperature range before re-circulating back into the air intakemanifold 1018.

In some optional embodiments, a waste gate valve 1036 may be used. Byopening the waste gate valve 1036, some or all of the combusted exhaustgases from the exhaust manifold(s) 1020 can bypass the turbine 1032. Asa result, the back-pressure supplied to the fins of the turbine 1032 canbe controlled, which in turn, controls the degree to which thecompressor 1034 compresses the input air eventually supplied to theintake manifold 1018.

In various non-exclusive embodiments, the turbine 1032 may use avariable geometry subsystem, such as a variable vane or variable nozzleturbocharger system. In which case, an internal mechanism (not shown)within the turbine 1032 alters a gas flow path through the fins of theturbine to optimize turbine operation as the exhaust gas flow ratethrough the turbine changes. If the turbine 1032 is part of a variablegeometry or variable nozzle turbocharger system, the waste gate 1036 maynot be required.

The EGR system 1040 includes an EGR valve 1042 and an EGR cooler 1044.The EGR valve 1042 is fluidly coupled to one or more of the exhaustmanifolds 1020A and/or 1020B and is arranged to provide a controlledamount of the combusted exhaust gases to the EGR cooler 1044. In turn,the EGR cooler 1044 cools the exhaust gases before re-circulating theexhaust gases back into the intake manifold 1018. By adjusting theposition of the EGR valve 1042 the amount of exhaust gas re-circulatedinto the intake manifold 1018 is controlled. The more the EGR valve 1042is opened, the more exhaust gas flows into the intake manifold 1018.Conversely, the more the EGR valve 1042 is closed, the less exhaust gasis re-circulated back into the intake manifold 1018.

The recirculation of a portion of the exhaust gases back into theinternal combustion engine 1016 acts to dilute the amount of fresh airsupplied by the intake runners 1022 to the cylinders. By mixing thefresh air with gases that are inert to combustion, the exhaust gases actas absorbents of combustion generated heat and reduce peak temperatureswithin the cylinders. As a result. NO_(x) emissions are typicallyreduced.

Skip Fire Engine Control

The skip fire engine controller 1014 is responsible for skip fireoperation of the internal combustion engine 1016. During operation, theskip fire controller 1014 receives a torque request. In response, theskip fire engine controller 1014 selects a firing pattern or fractionfor the cylinders to meet the requested torque. As the torque demandchanges, the firing pattern or firing fraction changes accordingly.Thus, for a given firing fraction pattern, skip fire engine controlcontemplates selectively firing cylinders during some firingopportunities, while selectively skipping the firing of other cylindersduring other firing opportunities. In an alternative embodiment, theskip fire engine controller 1014 can be a dynamic skip fire enginecontroller. In which case, the decision to fire or skip each cylinder ismade either on (a) a firing opportunity-by-firing opportunity basis,meaning just prior to the start of the next working cycle of eachcylinder or (b) on an engine cycle-by-engine cycle basis.

Fault Detection System

The fault detection system 1012 is a diagnostic tool that performs atleast two diagnostic operations. First, the fault detection system 1050uses models, which are maintained in an accessible storage location,indicative of both successful cylinder firings and successful cylinderskips to determine if the six cylinders 1-6 of the internal combustionengine 1016 have successfully fired or successfully skipped per commandsfrom the skip fire engine controller 1014. Second, the fault detectionsystem 1012 is arranged to generate and use a filtered exhaust gaspressure readings for detecting faults in the turbocharger system 1030and/or the EGR valve of the EGR system 1040 if optionally used.

Exhaust Pressure Sensor(s) and Locations

The fault detection system 1012 relies on one or more exhaust pressuresensor(s) that are used to measure exhaust pressure. In accordance withvarious embodiments, the exhaust pressure sensor(s) may be provided at anumber of different locations. For example, an exhaust pressure sensor1052 may be provided on each exhaust runner 1024 for each cylinder ofthe internal combustion engine 1016. In another embodiment, an exhaustpressure sensor 1054 may be provided within the exhaust manifolds 1020.For instance, in the particular embodiment illustrated in FIG. 19, twoexhaust pressure sensors 1054 are provided for each of the exhaustmanifolds 1020A and 1020B respectively. In yet another embodiment, oneexhaust pressure sensor 1056 is provided downstream from the exhaustmanifolds 1020A and 1020B. It should be noted that the exhaust pressuresensors 1052, 1054 and 1056, provided in three different locations inFIG. 19, are intended to be merely illustrative and are by no means arequirement. In most actual or real-world embodiments, typically justone of the three locations would be used. Having exhaust pressuresensors at two or all three locations is typically not necessary, butcould be implemented if desired.

There are advantages and disadvantages with each of the above-mentionedexhaust pressure sensor locations. Runner based exhaust pressure sensors1052 offer several advantages. Initially, since exhaust valves of thecylinders exhaust directly into the exhaust runners 1024, the positionof the pressure sensors 1052 allow exhaust events to be detected morequickly compared to the down-stream pressure sensors. As a result,potential faults can be detected sooner. In addition, the pressuresignal generated by the pressure sensors 1052 tend to be “cleaner” andcarry more information compared to similar signals from pressure sensorslocated downstream for a number of reasons, including (a) less dampingof the pressure wave due to their proximity to the cylinders and (b)individual cylinder runners generally experience less influence fromother cylinders than components located further downstream. The cleanersignal is particularly useful when trying to identify other exhaustvalve faults that are more subtle than a total failure of an exhaustvalve to either open or close after a fire or skip event. Such otherfaults include valve lift faults where the valve does not lift thedesired amount, valve timing faults where the timing of the opening andclosing of the exhaust valve varies from the intended time, and failureto deactivate faults associated with skipped firing opportunities.

With runner based pressure sensors 1052, one is needed for eachcylinder. The main drawback of runner based exhaust pressure sensors1052 is therefore mainly cost and complexity.

Conversely, downstream sensors 1054 and 1056 tend to produce signalsthat are less clean and carry less information. As a result, the abilityto detect faults when these sensors are used is likely to be lessaccurate and potentially slower. The advantage, however, of usingsensors located only within the exhaust manifold(s) 1020A and 1020Band/or downstream of the exhaust manifolds is that typically fewersensors are needed. Costs and complexity are therefore reduced.

Exhaust Gas Pressure Fluctuations

When a cylinder successfully fires, combustion of an air-fuel mixtureoccurs during the power stroke of the working cycle as the piston movesfrom Top Dead Center (TDC) to Bottom Dead Center (BDC). As is well knownin the art with Diesel engines, pressure and heat causes the combustion,while a spark is used for ignition with gasoline-fueled engines. Witheither type of engine, the hot, combusted gases are exhausted from theworking chamber of the cylinder during the exhaust stroke. When thepiston reaches BDC, the exhaust valve(s) of the cylinder are opened andthe piston moves toward TDC. As a result, the combustion gases areforced out or expelled from the cylinder, causing a surge of the hot,combusted, gases into the corresponding exhaust runner 1024 and to passthrough exhaust manifold 1020A and 1020B.

If a cylinder commanded to fire misfires, however, little to nocombustion occurs during the power stroke. As a result, there is littleto no surge in pressure during the exhaust stroke in the correspondingexhaust runner 1024 and exhaust manifold 1020A or 1020B as compared to asuccessful firing.

With skips, the complement of the above occurs. With a successful skip,there is no combustion and the exhaust valve is typically deactivated.As a result, little to no surge in pressure passes through thecorresponding exhaust runner 1024 and exhaust manifold 1020. Withunsuccessful skips, however, the exhaust valve may partially or fullyopen, and in addition, some combustion may occur depending on the natureof the failure. Either way, there will typically be some surge in thepressure in the exhaust systems as either air is pumped through thecylinder and/or some combusted gases are exhausted.

The measured pressure of a successful firing during a working cycle istherefore essentially a pulse. If the firing was unsuccessful, thenthere will be little to no pulse. On the other hand with successfulskips, there is little to no pulse, but with unsuccessful skips, thereis typically a pulse of some magnitude. In each case, these pressurefluctuations can be measured by any of the pressure sensors 1052, 1054and/or 1056. Thus, from the measured pressure readings, the in-cylinderpressure just prior to the exhaust valve opening can be estimated. Fromthe estimated pressure reading, a determination can be made (1) if acombustion event occurred or not and (2) if a combustion event occurred,what was the work output. With this information, a determination can bemade if the cylinder successfully implemented or not a fire command or askip command.

Referring to FIG. 20A, an exemplary plot 1060 of expected exhaust gaspressure fluctuations over several working cycles is shown. In thisparticular plot, the solid line 1062 shows the expected exhaust gaspressure pulses over four fired working cycles, each labeled 1064A,1064B, 1064C and 1064D respectively. The dashed line 1066 shows theactual pressure as measured by any of the sensors 1052, 1054 or 1056. Inthis particular example, the measured pressure fluctuations or pulses1066 closely tracks the expected exhaust gas fluctuations for workingcycles 1064A, 1064B and 1064D, but not 1064C. For working cycle 1064C,the magnitude of the pulse, as designated by arrow 1068, is much smallerthan the other pulses. When the expected and measured signals 1062, 1066closely track one another, it is indicative of a successful firing. Whenthey do not, it is indicative of an unsuccessful firing (i.e., amisfire). Thus, the plot 1060 shows successful firings over workingcycles 1064A, 1064B and 1064D, but a misfire for 1064C.

Referring to FIG. 20B, an exemplary plot 1070 of expected exhaust gaspressure fluctuations over several working cycles is shown. In this plot1070, the solid line 1072 shows the expected pressure, whereas themeasured exhaust pressure is represented by the dashed line 1074.

In this example, three successful fired working cycles 1076A, 1076B and1076D are shown. In each of these cases, the measured pressure 1074closely tracks the expected pressure 1072.

Working cycle 1076C, however, is indicative of an unsuccessful skip.With a skipped working cycle, the expected pressure 1072 is very lowbecause no combustion is expected and the exhaust valve of the skippedcylinder is typically not opened. But with an unsuccessful skip, themeasured pressure 1074 will be relatively higher, as signified in thisexample by the arrow 1078, which is indicative that some combustion mayhave occurred and/or the exhaust valve malfunctioned and opened allowingair to pump through the cylinder.

It should be noted that the plots 1060, 1070 can be interpreted in oneof several ways, depending on the location of the pressure sensor(s)used to measure the actual exhaust. For example:

-   -   1. If the pressure sensor is one of the sensors 1052 located        along an exhaust runner 1024, then the successive work cycles        illustrated in the two plots 1060, 1070 are indicative of the        same cylinder over four successive engine cycles. For example,        if the cylinder in question is number 3, then the plots 1060,        1070 show the measured pressure output of cylinder 3 over four        successive engine cycles.    -   2. On the other hand if the pressure sensor is either one of the        pressure sensors 1054 located within an exhaust manifold 1020A        or 1020B or the pressure sensor 1056 located downstream of the        exhaust manifolds 1020A, 1020B, then the two plots 1060, 1070        show working cycles of different cylinders operating in their        sequence order during one engine cycle.

With both plots 1060, 1070, the measured pressure as illustrated closelytracks the expected pressure. In actual embodiments, however, dependingon which of sensors 1052, 1054 and/or 1056 is used, there may be a timeoffset between the expected and measured pressure. The farther away thesensor is from the cylinders, the longer it takes for the combustedgases to propagate through the exhaust runners 1024 and manifolds 1020A,1020B and reach the measuring sensor. As a result, if sensors 1052 inthe exhaust sensors are used, then the time offset is minimal, but willbecome larger if sensors 1054 or 1056 are used. As a general rule, thefurther away from the cylinders the pressure measurement readings aretaken, the larger the time offset.

Creating Exhaust Pressure Models Using Empirical Data

The applicant has discovered that empirical data can be used toconstruct fire and skip models that can be used by the fault detectionsystem 1012 to determine if commands to either fire or skip cylinders ofthe internal combustion engine 1016 were successful or not.

Referring to FIG. 21A, an exemplary flow diagram 1080 illustrating stepsfor developing the fire model is illustrated.

In step 1082, empirical data indicative of exhaust pressure readings forfired working cycles of the cylinders are collected.

In step 1084, a first distribution range of exhaust pressures forsuccessful cylinder firings is defined from the empirical data.

In step 1086, an average exhaust pressure for successful cylinder firingis defined. In other words once the pressure readings from successfulfirings have been placed in the first distribution range, the average iscalculated from those readings.

In step 1088, a second distribution range of exhaust pressures forunsuccessful cylinder firings is defined from the empirical data.

In step 1090, an average exhaust pressure for the unsuccessful cylinderfiring is defined.

In step 1092, a threshold between the two distribution ranges isdefined.

Referring to FIG. 21B, an exemplary fire pressure distribution model1100 is illustrated. The distribution model 1100 shows a firstdistribution range 1102 for successful firings and an average exhaustpressure 1102A for the successful firings. The distribution model 1100also shows a second distribution range 1104 for unsuccessful cylinderfirings and an exhaust pressure average 1104A for unsuccessful firings.A threshold 1106 is defined between the two ranges 1102, 1104.

The threshold 1106 of the model 1100, as defined in step 1092, is usedby the fault detection system 1012 to make a determination if a firecommand for a cylinder during actual operation of the internalcombustion engine 1016 was successful or not. If the measured exhaustpressure resulting from the fire command is above the threshold 1106,then the fault detection system 1012 determines that the fire commandwas successfully implemented. On the other hand if the measured exhaustpressure is below the threshold 1106, then the fault detection system1012 determines that the fire command was unsuccessfully implemented bythe cylinder.

Referring to FIG. 22A, an exemplary flow diagram 1110 illustrating stepsfor developing the skip model is illustrated.

In step 1112, empirical data indicative of exhaust pressure readings forskipped working cycles of cylinders are collected.

In step 1114, a first distribution range of exhaust pressures forsuccessful cylinder skips is defined from the empirical data.

In step 1116, an average exhaust pressure for successful cylinder skipsis defined. In other words once the pressure readings from successfulskips have been placed in the first distribution range, the average iscalculated from those readings.

In step 1118, a second distribution range of exhaust pressures forunsuccessful cylinder skips is defined from the empirical data.

In step 1120, an average exhaust pressure for the unsuccessful skips ofthe cylinders is defined.

In step 1122, a threshold between the two distribution ranges isdefined.

Referring to FIG. 22B, a skip pressure distribution model 1130 isillustrated. The distribution model 1130 shows a first distributionrange 1132 for successful skips and an average exhaust pressure 1132Afor the successful skips. The distribution model 1130 also shows asecond distribution range 1134 for unsuccessful cylinder skips and anexhaust pressure average 1134A for the unsuccessful skips. The threshold1136 is defined between the two ranges 1132, 1134.

The threshold 1136 of model 1130, as defined in step 1122, is used bythe fault detection system 1012 to make a determination if a skipcommand for a cylinder during actual operation of the internalcombustion engine 1016 was successful or not. If the measured exhaustpressure resulting from the skip command is below the threshold, thenthe fault detection system 1012 determines that the skip command wassuccessful. On the other hand if the measured exhaust pressure is abovethe threshold 1136, then the fault detection system 1012 determines thatthe skip command was unsuccessful.

The empirical data used to create the models 1100, 1130 may be collecteda number of ways. For instance, the data can be collected from theinternal combustion engine 1016 or similar engines. The data can also becollected in real time during the operation of the vehicle. As the datais collected, the various distribution ranges are updated and theaverages defined. As a general rule, the more empirical data used, themore complete and representative of real-world driving conditions thedistributions 1100, 1130 will be. With this in mind, a large number ofthe exhaust pressure readings are typically used, typically in the rangeof at least tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of samples, butmany more or fewer samples may be used.

Once these distribution models 1100, 1130 are constructed, they aretypically stored in location 1050 where they are readily accessible bythe fault detection system 1012.

Creating Exhaust Pressure Models Using a Neural Network

As previously described, neural networks are computing systems that“learn” to perform tasks by considering examples, generally withoutbeing programmed with any task-specific rules. The Applicant has foundthat a neural network can be used to (1) learn successful cylinderfirings and successful cylinder skips from measured exhaust pressurereadings collected from empirical data and (2) make determination ifactual cylinder fire or skip commands were successful or not bycomparing measured exhaust pressure readings from learned models ofsuccessful cylinder firings and successfully cylinder skips.

Referring to FIG. 23, a neural network 1140 that can be used forinferring whether any given firing opportunity is a fault based onexhaust manifold gas pressure readings is illustrated.

The neural network 1140 includes an input(s) 1142, an inputpre-processing layer 1143, one or more hidden layer(s) 1144(a) through1144(n) and an output layer 1146.

The input layer 1143 is arranged to receive a number of inputs. In oneembodiment, the inputs include the distribution models 1100, 1130 asdescribed above.

In another non-exclusive embodiment using the neural network to predictexhaust pressure, the inputs may also include one or more of variableinputs provided in Table I, including (a) fuel mass per cylinder (b)intake manifold pressure samples, (c) Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR)valve position samples, (d) Variable Geometry Turbo (VGT) vane positionsamples, (e) waste gate position samples, (f) a skip or fire status ofeach of one or more cylinders of the internal combustion engine, (g)engine speed, (h) cylinder load, and (i) measured pressure sampleswithin the cylinders of the internal combustion engine. It should beunderstood that the list of inputs provided herein are exemplary andshould not be construed as limiting. Fewer or more inputs can be used aswell. With this embodiment, the inputs can be used to predict an exhaustmanifold pressure reading for fired or skipped cylinder events. Thepredicted reading can then be compared to an actual reading to determineif a fault occurred.

The input pre-processing layer 1143 may also optionally normalize anyreceived inputs. By normalization, any inputs that are measured ondifferent scales are adjusted to be measured on a common or similarscale.

Each of one or more hidden layers 1144(a)-1144(n) includes one or moreprocessors (Θ₁, Θ₂, Θ₃, . . . Θ_(N)) for implementing functions. Each ofthe hidden layers 1144(a)-1144(n) is arranged to receive inputs fromprevious layer and provide processed outputs to the next layer. Forinstance, the first hidden layer 1144(a) receives the normalized inputsfrom the pre-processing layer 1143 and provides processed outputs to thesecond hidden layer 1144(b). The second hidden layer 1144(b), afterprocessing its inputs, provides its processed output to the next hiddenlayer 1144(c). This process is repeated from each of the hidden layers.

The last hidden layer 1144(n) processes its inputs and provides itsoutput to the output layer 1146, which may perform furtherpost-processing. One result of the output layer 1146 is an updatedversion of the fire distribution model 1100 defining threshold 1106 andan updated version of the skip distribution model 1130 definingthreshold 1136. The updated models 1100, 1130 are provided to the inputlayer 142. As a result, the models 1100, 1130 are continually updatedduring operation of the internal combustion engine, generating moreaccurate models.

The output layer 1146 can also be configured to generate a fault flageach time a fault is detected. In other words if a cylinder is commandedto be fired and the measured exhaust manifold gas pressure reading fallsoutside the pressure distribution range for an successful fire, then thecylinder event is flagged as a fault. Similarly with skip commands,cylinder events are flagged as unsuccessful if their measured exhaustmanifold gas pressure reading falls outside the pressure distributionrange for an successful skip.

In the neural network shown, only three tiers of hidden layers 1144(a),1114(b) and 1114(n) are shown for the sake of simplicity. It should beunderstood that any number of hidden layers may be used.

The neural network 1140 may be trained by collecting a large number ofdata points under a variety of test engine operating condition, such as,but not limited to, firing density, cylinder load, overall engine torquedemand, turbocharger settings, exhaust gas recirculation settings, andengine speed. The test engine may have special instrumentation andcontrol functions that are not on production engines. Faults arepurposely introduced into the data by deliberately cutting fuel onselected firing opportunities to replicate unsuccessful fires.

The neutral network 1140 can also be utilized to track exhaust pressurereadings for both firing and skipped opportunities having correct orincorrect valve actuation. Based on the gathered data, the neuralnetwork 1410 learns which exhaust pressure readings correspond to faultyvalve operation for both unsuccessful fires and skips and which firingopportunities correspond to proper valve operation for successful firesand skips. It should be appreciated that the neutral network 1140 needsto know whether a firing opportunity is intended to be skipped or firedin determining whether the firing opportunity was correctly executed.Also, the neutral network 1140 may need to know a skip fire pattern offiring opportunities prior to and after a test firing opportunity indetermining whether the test firing opportunity was correctly executed.

Once a large data set of test points representing both correct andfaulty valve operation is collected and analyzed by the neutral network1140, the neutral network may then be used to predict whether the valveson a given firing opportunity operated correctly. These predictions maybe compared against data where once again the engine has deliberatelyintroduced valve faults. If the training has been successful, the neuralnetwork 1140 can accurately predict valve faults and the training isvalidated. If the neutral network 1140 does not accurately predict valvefaults it can be retrained until acceptable performance is achieved. Theresulting algorithm can then be used in production engines as part of anon-board diagnostic (OBD) system and/or maintained in a storage location1050 that is accessible by the fault detection system 1012.

Dynamic Multi-Level Skip Fire

In some applications, referred to as dynamic multi-level skip fire,individual working cycles that are fired may be purposely operated atdifferent cylinder outputs levels—that is, using purposefully differentair charge and corresponding fueling levels. By way of example, U.S.Pat. No. 9,399,964 describes some such approaches and is incorporated byreference herein for all purposes. The individual cylinder controlconcepts used in dynamic skip fire can also be applied to dynamicmulti-charge level engine operation in which all cylinders are fired,but individual working cycles are purposely operated at differentcylinder output levels. Dynamic skip fire and dynamic multi-charge levelengine operation may collectively be considered different types ofdynamic firing level modulation engine operation in which the output ofeach working cycle (e.g., skip/fire, high/low, skip/high/low, etc.) isdynamically determined during operation of the engine, typically on anindividual cylinder working cycle by working cycle (firing opportunityby firing opportunity) basis. It should be appreciated that dynamicfiring level modulation engine operation is different than conventionalvariable displacement in which when the engine enters a reduceddisplacement operational state a defined set of cylinders are operatedin generally the same manner until the engine transitions to a differentoperational state.

The methods described above for DSF operation can be used with dynamicfiring level modulation operation. To make the methods described abovework with dynamic firing level modulation operation, data on misfireevents may be collected while an engine is under dynamic firing levelmodulation operation. The previously described machine learning mayanalyze data in the same manner as previously described and detectmisfires in an analogous manner.

Rolling Cylinder Deactivation

In dynamic skip fire and various other dynamic firing level modulationengine control techniques, an accumulator or other mechanism may be usedto track the portion of a firing that has been requested, but notdelivered, or that has been delivered, but not requested. However, thedescribed techniques are equally applicable to engines controlled usingother types of skip fire or firing level modulation techniques includingvarious rolling cylinder deactivation techniques, where cylinders arefired and skipped in a predefined “rolling pattern”. For example, athree-cylinder engine operating at a firing density of ½, where eachcylinder is alternatively fired and skipped on successive workingcycles.

CONCLUSION

The present embodiments should be considered illustrative and notrestrictive and the invention is not to be limited to the details givenherein, but may be modified within the scope and equivalents of theappended claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A system, comprising: an internal combustionengine having a plurality of cylinders; a skip fire engine controllerarranged to operate the cylinders of the internal combustion engine in askip fire manner, the skip fire operation involving firing the cylindersduring some working cycles and skipping the cylinders during otherworking cycles; a storage unit arranged to store: a first model ofexhaust pressures indicative of successful firings of the cylinders ofthe internal combustion engine; and a second model of exhaust pressuresindicative of successful skips of the cylinders of the internalcombustion engine; and a neural network arranged to generate faultsignals for working cycles of the cylinders that were eitherunsuccessfully fired or unsuccessfully skipped by comparing a measuredexhaust pressure with (a) the first model for fire commands and (b) thesecond model for skip commands.
 2. The system of claim 1, wherein thefirst model includes: a first distribution range of exhaust pressuresfor successful firings; a second distribution range of exhaust pressuresfor unsuccessful firings; and a threshold exhaust pressure between thefirst distribution range and the second distribution range.
 3. Thesystem of claim 2, wherein the neural network makes a decision togenerate a fault signal for a working cycle of a cylinder thatunsuccessfully fired if the measured exhaust pressure for the workingcycle falls below the threshold.
 4. The system of claim 1, wherein thesecond model includes: a first distribution range of exhaust pressuresfor successful skips; a second distribution range of exhaust pressuresfor unsuccessful skips; and a threshold exhaust pressure between thefirst distribution range and the second distribution range.
 5. Thesystem of claim 4, wherein the fault detection system makes a decisionto generate a fault signal for a working cycle of a cylinder thatunsuccessfully skipped if the measured exhaust pressure for the workingcycle is above the threshold.
 6. The system of claim 1, wherein thefirst model and the second model are maintained in storage locationsaccessible by the neural network.
 7. The system of claim 1, wherein thefirst model and the second model are constructed from empirical datacollected from multiple firings and multiple skips of the cylinders ofthe internal combustion engine.
 8. The system of claim 1, wherein thefirst model and the second model are updated by the neural networkduring operating of the internal combustion engine.
 9. The system ofclaim 1, wherein the measured exhaust pressure is measured using one ormore pressure measuring sensors located in one of the following: (a) anexhaust runner fluidly coupling a cylinder to an exhaust manifoldassociated with the internal combustion engine; (b) within an exhaustmanifold; (c) downstream of the exhaust manifold; or (d) any combinationof (a) through (c).
 10. The system of claim 1, wherein the internalcombustion engine is one of the following types of internal combustionengines: (a) a Diesel-fueled engine; (b) a gasoline-fueled engine; (c) aspark ignition engine; or (d) a compression ignition engine.